Legal Opinion

In re Melvin Fink

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided April 15, 2011No. 2010-164PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.

¶ 1. A panel of the Professional Responsibility Board concluded that respondent violated Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct 1.5(c) and 8.4(a) for failing to put a contingent fee agreement in writing and for attempting to charge an unreasonable fee. The panel recommended that respondent be publicly reprimanded and placed on probation. We elected to review that determination on our own motion. In this Court, disciplinary counsel argues that respondent’s actions warrant a suspension of his license. Respondent claims that he did not violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, and,…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. In Re GerardIllinois Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Matter of SwartzArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  3. In Re BerkSupreme Court of Vermont · 1991
  4. In Re Disc. Proceeding Against PreszlerWashington Supreme Court · 2010
  5. The Florida Bar v. TobkinSupreme Court of Florida · 2006

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. In re Strouse, Esq.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2011
  2. In re Glenn Robinson, Esq. (Office of Disciplinary Counsel)Supreme Court of Vermont · 2019
  3. In re William J. McCarty, Jr.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2013
  4. In re Christena Obregon, Esq.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2016
  5. In re Richard Bowen, Esq.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2021

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API